This month 335 new MPs began their first full year in Parliament blissfully ignorant of the danger lurking around them, even in the Commons chamber where they sit.
Few, if any, will know that the Palace of Westminster, which houses the Commons and the Lords, is riddled with asbestos, a deadly building material banned in all forms since 1999 yet never removed from hundreds of thousands of public buildings in the UK, including 90 per cent of hospitals and 83 per cent of schools.
The new MPs will be told that their working environment is safe, that the 2,500 locations in 680 rooms where asbestos has been discovered in the Palace are being properly managed. But a Mail investigation into two incidents – in which at least 117 workers were exposed to asbestos fibres during refurbishment projects – in the tower housing Big Ben and in the apartments of the Speaker of the House of Commons – suggests that sometimes they are not.
These 117 workers are now at risk of developing mesothelioma, a cancer affecting the mesothelium, a membrane surrounding the lungs, heart and intestines.
In the vast majority of cases, the lungs are worst affected. It can take 20 to 60 years between exposure to asbestos and the appearance of symptoms – usually abdominal and chest pain, coughing and breathlessness caused by a build-up of fluid on the lungs.
Once a diagnosis is made, most victims die within a year. There is no cure, only treatments such as chemotherapy and immunotherapy which can slow down the growth of the cancer. Not everyone exposed to asbestos develops mesothelioma but among those who do, it is always fatal.
Asbestos-related illness is the biggest industrial killer in the UK, with at least 5,000 people a year succumbing to it, more than half from mesothelioma. Others suffer from asbestosis, a hardening of the lungs, or lung cancer.
To put that number into perspective, there were 590 murders in England and Wales last year. The most recent tragedy involving building materials – sub-standard cladding – was the Grenfell fire disaster in which 72 people died.
For decades, the policy of successive governments has been to leave asbestos where it is if it is boxed off, painted over or not broken and shedding fibres.
But since tens of thousands of schools, hospitals and other public buildings are now being used beyond their intended lifespans and are crumbling, campaigners argue this policy is no longer working. The UK has the highest mesothelioma mortality rate in the world with 60.5 per million in men and 13 per million in women. In the USA, the rate is less than nine per million.
This amounts to a death toll equivalent to one Grenfell fire tragedy every five days.
‘This is a national scandal beyond belief, yet government policy has been to do nothing, to have no plan, to be paralysed by the enormity of the problem facing us,’ says Liz Darlison, CEO of the charity Mesothelioma UK. ‘We can only hope the new intake of MPs will finally sit up and take notice of the disaster facing us as a nation.’
Asbestos, a naturally occurring, mined silicate fibre, was used for 150 years in roofing, building insulation, floor and ceiling tiles, and as a fire retardant.
It was everywhere – in brake linings, pipe lagging, boilers, oven gloves and even ironing board covers – until research proved it was potentially harmful.
The most dangerous types of asbestos, blue and brown, were banned in 1985, followed by a complete moratorium on them all, including the least dangerous (but still potentially deadly) white asbestos, in 1999.
After that, the word ‘asbestos’ fell from the public consciousness as if it had become a thing of the past that had gone away. Except it hadn’t. According to the policy and research group ResPublica, there are still 6 million tonnes of the material in more than 1.5 million buildings in the UK.
That is why today the Mail launches a major campaign to address this urgent problem with the creation of a digital national asbestos database – which is crucial to forming a long-term strategic plan to eradicate asbestos risk from British infrastructure. The strategy should make schools a priority.
Meanwhile, as we shall see, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) must change how it records ‘asbestos’ deaths to better understand current exposure levels to the toxic material.
Mesothelioma UK and lawyers representing victims say they are seeing a growing number of workers separate from those traditionally affected by asbestos, such as shipbuilders, miners, plumbers and builders who came into direct contact with the material.
This new cohort includes individuals who have never worked with asbestos but were exposed to it in their workplaces – teachers, nurses, doctors and school and hospital support staff.
According to the HSE, the number of women being affected is on the increase. In 2020, 220 were claiming industrial injuries benefit for mesothelioma; in 2021 that leapt to 325.
Alice Mahon, Labour MP for Halifax for 18 years, died from mesothelioma last year, aged 85. She had assumed that, having previously been an auxiliary nurse, she had been exposed to asbestos in a hospital – but later worried it was in the House of Commons. Her son, Professor Kris Gledhill, told me: ‘She was certainly aware the Palace of Westminster was riddled with it.’
The way asbestos is dealt with in the Commons and Lords is seen as a bellwether for how it will be tackled nationally. The signs are not good.
Under The Control of Asbestos Regulations, a ‘duty holder’ must be appointed for every non-domestic building to keep a register of where asbestos is, and what condition it is in. But these registers are often paper versions and surveys conducted by the asbestos-removal sector have found many are inaccurate and out of date – meaning that works disturbs the material. There is no government central register of where the country’s asbestos is.
Two years ago, an inquiry by the Parliamentary Work and Pensions Committee, which oversees the work of the HSE, recommended setting up a national digital asbestos database that could be accessed using an app.
This would make workers safer and provide the information needed for government to begin a phased removal of asbestos, starting with schools and hospitals. However, the idea was rejected by the government and the HSE on grounds of cost and difficulty.
Other countries have not been so idle. Poland has had a national database since 2013 and a plan to remove all asbestos by 2032. The EU has plans to include asbestos removal in building renovation. And Belgium has pledged to remove all asbestos from buildings and infrastructure by 2040.
The Parliamentary Buildings (Restoration and Renewal) Act was passed in 2019 with the intention of refurbishing the dilapidated Palace of Westminster and making it a safe place to work. But five years on, no restoration work under this Act has even started. Last year, the Public Accounts Committee warned: ‘The Palace of Westminster, an iconic UNESCO world heritage site… remains in serious need of restoration and renewal. However, despite broad consensus on the critical nature of this work for almost 25 years, progress has been painfully slow.
‘With Parliament spending up to £2 million a week patching up the Palace, and a growing list of health and safety incidents, there is a real and rising risk that a catastrophic event will destroy the Palace before it is ever repaired and restored.’
So far, a decision has yet to be made over whether the Palace will be emptied of personnel for the work – estimated to cost up to£22 billion – or whether some MPs and staff will remain in it while refurbishment takes place around them. This would hold up the timetable so dramatically that the restoration could take as long as 70 years.
Having investigated two asbestos incidents in the building in depth, however, it seems clear that before renovation works start the entire building must be emptied – or ‘decanted’ – of MPs, peers and the 3,000-plus people who work for them in the Commons and Lords.
To explain why, let us look at the first asbestos ‘incident’ I investigated. It took place during Project Denison, the £80 million refurbishment in 2019 of Elizabeth Tower, which houses Big Ben, and its cause and consequences have never before been made public.
Even though it suffered wartime bomb damage, no significant refurbishments had been carried out on the 96-metre tower, given its name in 2012 in honour of the late Queen, since it was completed in 1856.
Nothing was overlooked in Project Denison, from the gilt cross and orb at its top, the movement and clock housings, to the great 14-tonne bell Big Ben itself, and the tower’s 334-step staircase. The project was managed by construction company Lendlease Consulting, with Sir Robert McAlpine builders, AECOM structural engineers and Purcell architects among the 600-strong team.
‘It was a complete renovation of the stonework, the clock mechanism, the face, everything, and the installation of a lift,’ one senior member of the project team told me. ‘In the belfry, all the metalwork was painted with lead-based paint and it all had to be shot-blasted off.’
This metalwork included brackets and plates that supported the bell. Before this work was undertaken, an expert from the now-defunct Whitechapel Bell Foundry, which cast Big Ben in 1858, was asked to examine the site.
In accordance with asbestos regulations, McAlpine says it had carried out a ‘Refurb & Demolition survey’ and found no asbestos in the location.
However, according to our senior source: ‘A couple of days after the visit from the bell foundry expert, the foundry’s records showed that there was “fibrous material” between the bolts and the steel brackets up there – and it could be anything.
‘That information was passed on to Lendlease, McAlpine’s and all of the other major project participants with the recommendation that they carry out an [additional] asbestos survey before sandblasting these steels, but no survey was carried out.’
I put this claim to Sir Robert McAlpine but it said only that during the initial survey ‘no asbestos was detected. The asbestos was concealed by lead paint and was a thin layer sandwiched between two metal plates’.
A spokesman added: ‘We take our responsibilities to the health, safety and wellbeing of our workforce incredibly seriously and complied with all the necessary regulations, with background testing finding that no one working on the project had been exposed.’
I have had access to an internal Lendlease progress report from March 2019 which confirms that asbestos was disturbed during the shot-blasting process. It says all work was immediately halted while a decontamination process – conducted at night – was completed. ‘There has been the discovery (and disturbance) of asbestos on site,’ it says.
‘This was discovered in the belfry within the clamp/framework build-up of the bells and disturbed during the shot-blasting process of the lead paint.’
It adds: ‘The recent discovery of asbestos has incurred significant time and cost impacts to the project. Heightened awareness on site could potentially incur time delay due to nervousness around discovery of asbestos.’
The report says its safety-risk management team had deemed this a ‘near miss’ under HSE regulations governing the ‘reporting of injuries, diseases and dangerous occurrences’.
Such incidents – abbreviated as RIDDOR – should be reported to the HSE and, when they are, a prosecution could follow.
An incident report was sent to the HSE but it was not considered serious enough to merit further investigation.
Lendlease declined to comment on the incident, passing my inquiries on to the House of Commons. A spokesman there also declined to comment, saying Sir Robert McAlpine was the principal contractor and it did not comment on its contractors’ practices. AECOM, too, provided no information.
McAlpine said no workers were affected. However, the Lendlease report at the time said clearing it up could take ‘multiple weeks’.
Lendlease was also in charge of the second incident, which involved renovations in the kitchen, known as room 1794, and a bedroom, room 5067, of the Speaker’s personal apartments.
This was part of an exercise known as the North Thames Project. Amosite, or brown asbestos fibres, second only to blue asbestos in their deadliness, were released during work to remove the ceilings in each room between October 23 and 27, 2021, with the conclusion that ‘asbestos containing materials’ (ACMs) were present not being arrived at until November 19’.
Incredibly, the HSE was not informed of the incident until February 10 the next year.
Checks of signing-in records established that 117 people – 81 contractors and 36 staff – could have been exposed to asbestos fibres. Each was sent a letter informing them and offering a chest X-ray and breathing tests at nearby St Thomas’ hospital – arguably a cosmetic exercise given that no symptoms of mesothelioma would become visible for at least 20 years.
I was passed a copy of the letter. It offered appointments with the House of Commons GP and Wellness Team and concluded: ‘We appreciate that you may find this information worrying and would take this opportunity to assure you that you will be afforded the support you require.’
This could involve check-ups for the rest of their lives.
An intermediary approached a number of the victims on my behalf, but all were too afraid of losing their jobs to comment.
The HSE investigation into the incident took two and a half years to complete, dragging on until three months ago.
At its conclusion, the HSE announced it had found ‘material breaches’ of asbestos and construction regulations. A House of Commons spokesperson said Palace authorities accepted the findings and had since taken action to minimise the risk of further incidents, including safety improvements, extra training for staff and the appointment of an independent asbestos specialist.
However, neither the HSE nor the Commons authorities would release the findings of the investigation, each suggesting that I submit a Freedom of Information request, which I did on July 12, to the HSE. Under the Freedom of Information Act, I should have received a response after 20 working days, August 9, but none was forthcoming.
In spite of several follow-up requests, the information was not released until September 26 – 36 working days late.
The report confirmed the negligent and shambolic way the asbestos discovery in the Speaker’s apartments was handled, and it identified Lendlease and several sub-contractors as being in breach of the Control of Asbestos Regulations, the legal framework that governs its removal.
It confirmed: ‘No refurbishment and demolition asbestos survey had been carried out for the ceilings in [the Speaker’s] rooms prior to their removal.’
The company that caused the release and exposure of the fibres was a small family joinery operation with just one director. I approached the director via his accountants but he did not respond.
The Mail has obtained a letter dated July 3 this year from Owen Rowley, the HSE inspector who conducted the investigation, to Tom Goldsmith, Corporate Officer of the House of Commons and the Clerk of the House responsible for maintaining the Palace. It paints a damning picture. Mr Rowley said the director had had ‘no formal health and safety training’. Further, he added: ‘The employees who removed the ceilings in rooms 5067 and 1794 also had no asbestos awareness training, which is considered standard industry practice for this type of work. These deficiencies should have been recognised during the tendering process and the fact that they were not… is indicative of the unsuitable management arrangements in place.’
Mr Rowley pointed out that in spite of the absence of such basic safety training, the joinery firm had been carrying out similar work at the Palace of Westminster for years without training in the safe handling of asbestos.
Mr Rowley found that: ‘The asbestos surveys relevant to the incident area were not clear or suitable and sufficient.’
He said that before the ceilings were torn down, no assessment had been carried out as to whether they might contain asbestos.
He concluded: ‘You have failed to make suitable arrangements for managing a project, including the allocation of sufficient time and other resources.
‘You also failed to ensure that these arrangements are maintained and reviewed throughout the project, and that suitable pre-construction information is provided to every designer and contractor appointed.’
In spite of such withering criticism, Mr Rowley chose not to impose a fine or any other punishment. Instead, he said he would charge a fee to cover the time spent investigating the infringements. Neither the HSE nor the Commons authorities would say how much the fee amounted to. The HSE would say only that the standard charge was £164 an hour. Given that the investigation took two and a half years, this could be a considerable sum.
Many staff at the Palace are now terrified that if a full ‘decant’ is not ordered they will be required to work in an asbestos-contaminated building that is being torn apart.
Ken Gall, President of the House of Commons Trade Union Side, which represents the four white and blue-collar unions recognised within the House, said: ‘Explain to me how we can have a quarter of the Palace of Westminster functioning as a day to day Parliament when work with the potential to disturb asbestos is taking place 20 feet away in a building site.
Professor Kevin Bampton, CEO of the British Occupational Hygiene Society, which promotes workplace safety, says the Palace authorities and some senior MPs are concerned that they might have an image problem if they decant.
‘They’re worried about how it might look,’ he says. ‘While millions of people working in the NHS, schools and other crumbling buildings have to go to work every day, knowing they could be exposed to asbestos, here are these MPs clearing out while their place of work is fixed.
‘But they’re wrong. It isn’t just about them; it’s about the 3,000 cleaners, electricians, plumbers, catering and administrative staff who serve them. I’d say it would be nigh-on impossible to keep those people safe while building work was going on around them. MPs should put them first.’
If Parliament is, indeed, a microcosm of the asbestos challenges facing the country, then the new MPs – who will face obfuscation, denial, obstruction and secrecy if they choose to take them on – have an opportunity to affect some change and finally do something about it, not just in the Palace of Westminster, but in schools, hospitals and other public buildings across the UK.
After all, there are 650 members in the House of Commons – which means the 335 new members would be a majority.